Windows 8 discussion (8.1 Update coming April 8)

Quick question about storage spaces. I am quite heavily invested in storage spaces and I am a little worried that if I reinstall Win8 it will give me a lot of trouble to get the storage pools and spaces back. Has anyone reinstalled Win8 and maintained the storage pools they set up?

Storage Spaces stores its metadata on the disks used in the pool. So, if you reinstall the CP, then you'll be fine. There's no guarantee that a Storage Space created on the CP will work with RTM.

No for me its been pretty decent. Infact I had to pull a disk and was able to recover my data (had to plug the disk back in). I do keep a backup so its not that big of a deal even if I had to reinitialize that space. Read speed is also good so I can't really complain.

I just installed the consumer preview, installed just fine on my Dell M4600. Resolution is 1920x1080. I joined it to my work domain and logged in with my domain account, now none of the live tiles work now. They open when I click on them to a full screen basic image of the tile, then about 10-15 seconds later it just goes back to the start screen. Anyone know why it's not working now? They worked when I first installed the OS, but not now. UAC is still on also.

I read somewhere that files in a storage space will always be striped across multiple drives if they are available. Is this true?

I'm debating if I should hold out until October or buy into FlexRAID, which just went commercial recently. While Windows 8 will obviously be a much more tested and integrated product, FlexRAID seems to have several benefits:

* Drives can be integrated with existing data without formatting.* Each drive can be accessed independently away from the parent PC (this would be hard if data was striped).

FlexRAID is basically a program that can pool drives together above the file system and offer redundancy to select data units through parity or mirroring.

Now that I've had some time to fiddle with the UI, I am grudgingly coming to accept it. There are definitely a few design failures of the objective sort, but I'm guessing most of it will be fixed in the near future. I'm not one of those clamoring for the return of the Start Menu any more, at least.

So I'll say now the exact same thing I said in 1995. "Dammit. I suppose I'd better get used to it."

Seeing how some "random" WU update just broke my start screen, do they really want to go with one single release candidate in summer? There doesn't even seem to be a techbeta, judging the lack of bragging rights on the web, where to report shit like this.

Also the "Refresh PC" option is the worst thing ever introduced. Any online help is pretty much some random bullshit followed by "or refresh your PC". Like that's going to help. Or is even a viable option for development systems. Like my box.

Also the "Refresh PC" option is the worst thing ever introduced. Any online help is pretty much some random bullshit followed by "or refresh your PC". Like that's going to help. Or is even a viable option for development systems. Like my box.

Yes, and that crfappy OS is so clearly gadget-oriented that admins probably won't be able to disable that option through GPO. Are they getting rid of these yet, BTW ? I Mean: you now have to register with MS to read your (exchange or google) mail, you a "convenient" "show my password" button in the login screen, built-in integration with cloud-based storage, the useless metro interface forced down your throat, what else can MS do to make this thing less work-friendly ?

What do you mean you have to register with Microsoft to read your email?

I mean that if you try to use the built-in mail reader using an account that isn't linked to a passport account (or whatever they call it this week), you're prompted for a login and can't go any further.

You can always install Outlook or whatever client you fancy, of course, but it's more the principle of the thing that bothers me: that OS is, under the hood, really nice and full of improvement over 7 but the front end and pretty much everything they built on top of it is screaming "professional users, go look somewhere else: this is Wintoy 8"

My current work setup with Windows 7 uses mirroring to extend the desktop to a 2nd monitor. While Windows 8 has multi-monitor support, from what I've seen Metro Start Screen is dictated to be on one of the monitors, so I would lose my 2nd desktop which is a deal-breaker. So far every demo I've seen of CP shows Metro on one monitor and desktop on the other. This is unacceptable to me.

My current work setup with Windows 7 uses mirroring to extend the desktop to a 2nd monitor. While Windows 8 has multi-monitor support, from what I've seen Metro Start Screen is dictated to be on one of the monitors, so I would lose my 2nd desktop which is a deal-breaker. So far every demo I've seen of CP shows Metro on one monitor and desktop on the other. This is unacceptable to me.

You don't really lose anything. I run dual monitors with the Win 8 CP and they work just fine. When the Metro/Start screen is up, the primary monitor is used to display the menu, but once a selection has been made, the metro/start screen goes away. However, if you start a Metro app, it only displays on the primary monitor while the secondary monitor continues to display the desktop and any window that were positioned to be displayed on the secondary monitor.

You don't really lose anything. I run dual monitors with the Win 8 CP and they work just fine. When the Metro/Start screen is up, the primary monitor is used to display the menu, but once a selection has been made, the metro/start screen goes away. However, if you start a Metro app, it only displays on the primary monitor while the secondary monitor continues to display the desktop and any window that were positioned to be displayed on the secondary monitor.

You don't really lose anything. I run dual monitors with the Win 8 CP and they work just fine. When the Metro/Start screen is up, the primary monitor is used to display the menu, but once a selection has been made, the metro/start screen goes away. However, if you start a Metro app, it only displays on the primary monitor while the secondary monitor continues to display the desktop and any window that were positioned to be displayed on the secondary monitor.

You don't really lose anything. I run dual monitors with the Win 8 CP and they work just fine. When the Metro/Start screen is up, the primary monitor is used to display the menu, but once a selection has been made, the metro/start screen goes away. However, if you start a Metro app, it only displays on the primary monitor while the secondary monitor continues to display the desktop and any window that were positioned to be displayed on the secondary monitor.

So...this, "works fine". Jesus.

Yes, it does work "just fine". I spend at least 99% of my time on the desktop, so it's not a problem, for me. Apparently having your primary monitor obscured for brief periods of time is a big issue for you. As always, YMMV.

I've used Win8 just a few times and I can say it's a giant step backwards in 'desktop' UI design. I'm not talking about ribbons or the Start Screen in general - I'm fine with those up to a point and understand the principles they're built upon. I'm talking about going from interface cues and controls to a completely hidden paradigm. I've used PCs for over 20 years and I couldn't believe I couldn't figure out how to close a program without Alt-F4. I only tried the drag down gesture because I read about it earlier. Where's the hover hint at least? What about top controls that appear when mouse slammed as an option? How about anything sane? (Yes, this is coming from someone that developed his own mouse-gesture utility - I get the irony.)

Well, the counter-argument is "why are you manually closing your apps?" Part of Win8 is to better manage that for you, so you don't have to explicitly bother closing things, you just use what you use and Win8 handles what needs to close in the background.

My problemt with letting Windows manage this for me is apps with concurrent licensing models. We have a few apps here with x concurrent users. How does Windows know that I need to close that App to allow someone else to use it?

What do you mean you have to register with Microsoft to read your email?

I mean that if you try to use the built-in mail reader using an account that isn't linked to a passport account (or whatever they call it this week), you're prompted for a login and can't go any further.

You can always install Outlook or whatever client you fancy, of course, but it's more the principle of the thing that bothers me: that OS is, under the hood, really nice and full of improvement over 7 but the front end and pretty much everything they built on top of it is screaming "professional users, go look somewhere else: this is Wintoy 8"

What do you mean you have to register with Microsoft to read your email?

I mean that if you try to use the built-in mail reader using an account that isn't linked to a passport account (or whatever they call it this week), you're prompted for a login and can't go any further.

You can always install Outlook or whatever client you fancy, of course, but it's more the principle of the thing that bothers me: that OS is, under the hood, really nice and full of improvement over 7 but the front end and pretty much everything they built on top of it is screaming "professional users, go look somewhere else: this is Wintoy 8"

Honestly, that sounds like a bug. Submit it.

I don't know, really: a login screen isn't exactly the way your typical bug will behave. It looks like an idea that turned bad: MS wanted to have all your mail account saved into a networked profile so it could easily be synchronized between machines and restored on a new machine (not a bad idea in itself) but, like everything they showed in Metro so far, they didn't think beyond the tablet usage and that resulted in the profile being locked to your passport account.

So it might be a missing feature, but it's both too basic and too polished to be a real bug.

In other news, the latest blog entry from MS, it looks like they seriously think people will use metro in the enterprise. I thought there was an ocean and continent between where these guys sit and where I sit but it seems we're not even living on the same planet.

In other news, the latest blog entry from MS, it looks like they seriously think people will use metro in the enterprise. I thought there was an ocean and continent between where these guys sit and where I sit but it seems we're not even living on the same planet.

For Windows on ARM (which is what they're talking about in that blog entry), that's the only option. Windows on ARM can't run third-party desktop apps.

In other news, the latest blog entry from MS, it looks like they seriously think people will use metro in the enterprise. I thought there was an ocean and continent between where these guys sit and where I sit but it seems we're not even living on the same planet.

For Windows on ARM (which is what they're talking about in that blog entry), that's the only option. Windows on ARM can't run third-party desktop apps.

Windows ARM is a tablet OS. It should only be available on tablets devices and that is just fine.

Again, Metro is probably going to be a nice tablet UI (and also good for the convertibles). But for desktops, it's a real disaster. That wouldn't be an issue in itself if we had a real choice between two UIs (and I would be actually happy to be able to run Metro apps on my desktop) if it wasn't forced on us by that idiotic start page and the fact that they are translating pretty much all the setup and built-in apps to it.

I mean: the PDF reader is useless if you're using it as a reference document, the mail app is also useless, mainly of the config screens are using Metro, even the search interface is using it (and proving way less usable than 7's as well as being slower to use because of the additional distance between things you must click and requiring the user of the mouse).

Windows RT is not a tablet OS and will not be restricted to tablets. It's highly likely that there will be Windows RT laptops.

Windows RT = Windows on ARM. I can see it on tablets and hybrids, but not laptops. People buy laptops for productivity and in order to do that you need either Windows or OS X. WinRT or iOS is not enough.

Windows RT is not a tablet OS and will not be restricted to tablets. It's highly likely that there will be Windows RT laptops.

Windows RT = Windows on ARM. I can see it on tablets and hybrids, but not laptops. People buy laptops for productivity and in order to do that you need either Windows or OS X. WinRT or iOS is not enough.

I know what it is, dear. My view remains the same: I think that it is inevitable that we will see at least one Windows RT laptop over its lifetime.

I know what it is, dear. My view remains the same: I think that it is inevitable that we will see at least one Windows RT laptop over its lifetime.

You're cutting hairs in four there: Windows RT is definitely designed as tablet OS (complete with metro-only limitation on your apps). if someone decides to load it on an entry-level laptop, that's their problem (personally, I'd rather go with a tablet + keyboard or simply a convertible).

I know what it is, dear. My view remains the same: I think that it is inevitable that we will see at least one Windows RT laptop over its lifetime.

You're cutting hairs in four there: Windows RT is definitely designed as tablet OS (complete with metro-only limitation on your apps). if someone decides to load it on an entry-level laptop, that's their problem (personally, I'd rather go with a tablet + keyboard or simply a convertible).

It will ship with a Metro version of office. That's all we know at the moment (unless you have more information that I do, of course). Inferring from that that "it's not for tablet" is really afr stretched: I have Pages and Numbers installed on my iPad and that doesn't turn it into a desktop or laptop, after all: the touch-cenric UI makes it really awkward to use for real spreadsheet editing or work processing but for some light editing and display, it's fine (and quite handy).

But that's moving away from the main point: Metro makes little sense outside of the tablet model (and perhaps phones although it doesn't look like Windows 8/WinRT will be implemented on phones, at least for now). By that, I mean: devices that are always on, runs on battery, with limited screen real-estate and a primarily touch-centric UI.

One can use Metro outside these parameters but it's pretty much as awkward as using Win7 on a tablet today: you can do it, but it's clearly not designed for this and it really feels like an after-though.

As for Windows RT, I don't see much point on using that on a "laptop" device, really except if you want to have a really cheap netbook and don't mind the limited functionality, compatibility and usability.

No it's not. It's going to be the same Office 15 you can buy for x86. It's Metro-styled. That's not the same thing as a Metro app.

Sorry, looks like you're both right and I was wrong. I was stuck in yesterday's story: indeed MS intends to support a desktop on ARM devices (and including at least one version of Office).

That doesn't mean the comment of mine that started this sub-discussion is wrong, though, just that I should have answered Jonathon differently.

Actually, yes, it's incorrect in the first part. The main idea I wanted to express was that Metro is not good at all on desktop, however fine it might be on touch-centric devices (and regardless on the underlying architecture).